How America Fell Behind in the World it Invented and How We can Come BackReviewed by Madeleine Kando
Although it is one of the most depressing books I've read in a long time, as a historical document, 'That Used to be Us' co-authored by Thomas Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum, is very informative. The first half explains in concise, well-written prose how America, since the end of the Cold War, has made mistake after mistake by misreading global events and reacting to them in the wrong way. This is partly a result of America's tendency to believe that it is the center of the world and that it is better than other countries. This breeds complacency and creates a skewed view of reality.
After the gloom and doom of the first part of the book, one would expect the second half to include some inspiring revelation on how to fix America. Even though things are really bad, 'We can Come Back', right? "Our big challenges today require the kind of national responses that wars have evoked” they write. But all they come up with are lots of examples without a general formula.
The fact is that the authors are part of the problem, not the solution. Friedman and Mandelbaum are part of the American elite, the establishment, and, even though they speak from a liberal platform, which is commendable, their book is addressed to the elite, not the average Joe. Page after page, they urge Americans to 'go the extra mile', to not just be an average assembly-line worker, but an exceptional one. So that we can compete, both as individuals and as a nation. Doing your best is not enough any more. You have to become 'the best of the best' at whatever you do.
But isn't that what brought America down in the first place? Trying to be the best? Why do we have to be number one all the time? Why do we have to be the ones to create a democratic state in the Middle East? Aren't we fleecing our own country in the process? What happened to not being the best but just enjoy being second best?
Why do we have to be what we used to be? Is it healthy for a nation to always have to be the leader, the top dog? Look at many European countries. They have thrived in their position as second fiddlers. It allowed them to accumulate wealth while the top dog was sweating it out, trying to protect the pack. America isn't about to disappear from the world map. It might not be at the front of the pack any more, but maybe that is not such a bad thing.
The authors are so concerned with maintaining America's 'exceptional' status in the world that they don't even realize that that time has come and gone. They mourn what we used to be, a global leader. Their description of how America 'invented' the world is, in one sense, accurate. (The whole world is wearing Levy's and playing rock and roll music). But is that still a viable goal in today's world?
It's hard on the ego to see someone else surpass you in achievements: China now has the fastest bullet train and the fastest computer, not us. The question is: at what price? The Fins have a better educational system. That's true but their system grew organically, it wasn’t' a result of self-denial or trying to be the best of the best.
Countries do what they can to be half-way decent places to live. America is no exception. If Friedman and Mandelbaum want us to be superhumans in order to remain number one, let them ask the same from other countries.
The reality is that our political system, even though it is dysfunctional at the moment, is the only one we have. Friedman's pie in the sky suggestion, that a third-party guru will materialize to create harmony and cooperation, is unrealistic. Let's focus on the mess we are in and try to avoid worse disasters.
I wish the authors were more honest in their intentions with this book. Who are they really talking to? Their message to the politicians, that it is imperative that we fix our infrastructure and our educational system, is the right one. If we don't, we'll not just be number 25 in the world, but we will become a Third World country.
Their message to the rest of us, however, that we should become superhuman to compete, rings hollow. We are already doing a superhuman effort just to survive. leave comment here
5 comments:
I am going to see if my library carries the book as I began reading a free sample on my phone! It got my attention so far.
I read the book and agree with what you say. They outline the situation well, as far as the nature of the changing world economy and why the US has lost its jobs. It is an elite perspective. But it also show how wrong the elite making decisions for this country are.
Their main solution, in addition to a third-party messiah, was to fund education. I have been a university trustee for over 20 years and can tell you they have it backwards: the economy drives education, not the other way around. Our school prepares people for jobs that exist in the market. People will not pay for education, and especially borrow money for it, that does have a high probability of employment afterwards. For example, we have just shrunk traditional communications and added physician's assistants.
Funding education will not bring back jobs. They will only come back when the business climate here is more attractive than in other countries. When jobs come back, people will scrape money together to get the education they need for them. Right now many of the highest educated grads move overseas when they graduate, because they follow global employment trends. In our school, most science majors come from India or China and most return to serve growing businesses in their countries.
Also, they emphasize something called the Carlson principle that is related to inventiveness but fail to connect the dots. This principle argues that invention occurs on the boundaries of production: workers in plants think of better ways to do things.
Related to this is the fact that garage inventions like Apple Computer require wide availability of components like transistors, tubing, switches, various metal alloys, etc. In the 1960s, you could find these things in small supply shops all over the US where things were being produced. Today such suppliers are mostly in China near the centers of production there. This means that the odds are that the next Steve Jobs will come from China.
Throwing money at education is a fee-good chimera. It is a shame these elitists can't see that systemic reform, mostly related to laws and taxes, is necessary for production to return to the US.
Gordon's response to Madeleine makes many good points.
However, the debate is basically between two propositions:
1) (Friedman, Obama, et. al.): Major investment in education, science and research is a chief
CAUSE of economic progress and prosperity.
2) (Gordon): It is the opposite: a good economy - including a healthy and competitive business climate - is the CAUSE, and schools must adjust to and reflect the economy, i.e. they are the EFFECT.
To quote Gordon:
“The economy drives education, not the other way around,”
One thing you could say is that this is a chicken-or-egg issue. Yes, schools must teach the skills required by the economy. But schools can also push the economy forward by fostering science, research, innovation and critical thinking.
I’ll go one step further: In my view, the latter process is essential. It is because America has had the greatest higher education system in the world that it has led the world in nearly all areas of science and technology, including space and medicine, it gave the world the Internet, applications such as GPS, it has received more Nobel prices than all other countries combined.
There are always new scientific frontiers. Right now, for example, the mega-issue is the environment/energy crisis. This issue cries for science tocome to the rescue.
There is no better investment than in science, research and education. You see, science and education have an obligation to something that is
even more important that the economy: namely to solve human PROBLEMS. That is why they must LEAD, and not follow.
But instead, education budgets are under attack, as is science itself. Student achievement is deteriorating. Funding for research is declining. This is a tragedy.
I wish Tom's position was true. Certainly better educated people are more capable than those who are not. But without available resources and incentives to produce, those educations often go unused. So far we have been adopting that strategy and it has not worked.
Credit card technology is a perfect example of US decline and failure to adapt best business
practices world-wide. All over Europe, for the last 10 or so years,
banks have issued "Chip and Pin" credit cards. This innovation makes payments
easier and avoids some important kinds of fraud. These now dominate purchases
in Europe and in other significant regions. Americans traveling internationally
are finding that their old-fashioned magnetic strip cards are not accepted.
And worse, the banks seem indifferent to this important customer and fraud prevention issue.
A few US issuers now have the new cards but they are hard to find or obtain.
For details see http://emvcreditcard.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!